Military Events in Syria and Iraq thread #3

[Schmelzer]

So you go on about propaganda but don't watch any TV?
Do you listen to radio news?

No. I prefer the internet. There is enough Western propaganda in the internet too, sufficient to know what is claimed by the Western propaganda, given that the differences between different Western propaganda media are not very big. (In the past, there have been important differences between different papers, today they are no longer relevant.)

Russia had significant secret and other wise military assets and required the Ukraine to be a part of a Russian "Union" to satisfy it's paranoia about military invasion from the West and to secure those secret military assets ( Remember those predominantly empty white aid trucks entering and leaving the Ukraine?)
So when the rebels installed a pro-western government all those assets ( some secret ) became threatened with exposure.
..., however land access to the Crimea from the Donetsk region was of critical importance. Important enough to go to war over.
But securing the military assets that had been placed in the Ukraine (especially the Donetsk region), was the highest priority for Putin. (after securing the Crimea)
Shooting down commercial jet MH17 (July 2014) was a part of protecting those secrets.
And no I am not going to tell you what my sources are ... and yeah I already know "I can believe what I like.. so what!"

And I'm not even interested to look at them, they are obviously far too freaky. Simply LOL.

Just to note: If there would have been an interest for land access to Crimea, important enough to go to war, there would have been no Minsk I, but, instead, there would have been land access to Crimea now.
-------------------
There has been not much news from Syria, except that after a long time the Syrian side has made a greater attack on the outer side of Aleppo, and taken there an army base and a hill. Moreover, they attack the 1070 quarter, which played an important role in the terrorists attempts to break through, and the claims how much of it are now under SAA control vary between 70% and 90%.

 

[Quantum Quack]

No. I prefer the internet. There is enough Western propaganda in the internet too, sufficient to know what is claimed by the Western propaganda, given that the differences between different Western propaganda media are not very big. (In the past, there have been important differences between different papers, today they are no longer relevant.)

Little wonder you think it is all false propaganda and BS then, because in the main it is....
However when tv, radio and other sources combined confirm essentially the same thing then you have a better chance of gleaning an element of the truth. Then of course you apply a little common sense and look for contradictions etc and counter to human nature stuff.
For example:
Trump is not an idiot but is behaving like one...why?
Trump appears to be doing what he is being told to do... why?
Trump is personally extremely desperate and I would suggest scared sh*tl*ss. Why?
He expected HC to not survive the campaign due to an unexplained mystery respiratory illness ( fobbed off as pneumonia) and is frustrated about the fact that she is still kicking and very much alive...why?
He now suspects she is taking some campaign enhancement drugs. Why?
( after all campaign enhancement drugs - doping - is against the rules yes? )
and so on...

 

[Schmelzer]

However when tv, radio and other sources combined confirm essentially the same thing then you have a better chance of gleaning an element of the truth.

This would work if the different sources would be independent.

This is a hypothesis which can be tested. In particular, if the sources would be independent, one would not expect to see the same lies and distortions. But I have seen far too much consistent lies and distortions in very different Western media.
Here http://www.sciforums.com/threads/sh...that-lie-for-money.151895/page-3#post-3315870 was one example. Not the only one - I have known this before, seen other examples later, but here I had been challenged to fix the evidence, so I have done it.

I have seen such systematic consistent distortions in Russian mass media too. And therefore I also prefer to look at the internet to get information from Russia.

 

[CptBork]

Dabiq has fallen to the "FSA"/Turkish forces in north Syria east of Azaz.

Has the Kiingdom of God arrived? Has Allah appeared from the heavens? Do Muslims finally rule the Earth? That was what many ISIS supporters expected at what was prophesied in the Quran as the final battle between good (Islam) and evil (kufars) at Dabiq.

I'm guessing that ISIS is still expecting that final battle to be fought as Mohammed prophecied at Dabiq, and are just saying that this defeat wasn't that final battle, which is still to come.

Don't you just love religious and political cults in which the leader gets to be virtually dead wrong on every single major prediction, but in their followers' eyes that just proves even more how right they are on the whole? Obviously if dinosaur bones weren't enough to make these folks think twice about their fundamental world view, getting their asses kicked at Dabiq won't cause so much as a scratch.

 

[Yazata]

It looks like the long awaited operation to dislodge ISIS from Mosul has begun. Reportedly that first objective will be to flank the city on the west to cut it off from the rest of ISIS territory. Witnesses report columns of regular Iraqi army, Shiite and Sunni irregulars, US 101'st airborne and various US special forces, and Kurdish Peshmerga on the move. (What has happened to Washington's promises of no US boots on the ground?) US and other 'coalition' aircraft are flying airstrikes at a high rate. French and British aircraft may be involved. ISIS is reportedly replying to the movements with artillery.

A Kurdish spokesman say that his forces' objective is merely to take some Christian and other religious minority villages in the area (assuming those communities still exist and haven't been wiped out by ISIS) but not to enter the largely Arab city of Mosul, due to ethnic sensitivities. There's concern about the role of Shiite irregulars, since they are accused of atrocities against Sunnis in the past. The regular Iraqi army is eager to regain its honor (the sarcastic joke is that 'Iraq' stands for 'I ran away quickly'), but it performed reasonably well in earlier battles in Ramadhi and Fallujah. Apparently once the city is retaken (which may take a long time) it will be patrolled by the Sunni Arab irregulars, many of them Mosul locals.

The city and its suburbs had about 2.5 million people at its height, but many have fled ISIS rule. But there are still hundreds of thousands of people there. The UN fears an exodus of "Biblical proportions" once fighting in the city starts. Camps to receive the expected refugees are being set up, mostly in nearby Kurdish controlled territory.

It isn't believed that ISIS will try to defend the city's perimeter. That would spread the ISIS forces out too much. So penetrating many residential neighborhoods may be relatively easy. ISIS will probably try to defend the downtown, the government buildings and the maze-like old city.

http://www.foxnews.com/world/2016/1...l-operation-takes-hold.html?intcmp=latestnews

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-37674693

http://www.itv.com/news/story/2016-10-17/military-bid-to-drive-islamic-state-from-mosul-begins/

http://www.wsj.com/articles/iraqi-forces-advance-toward-isis-held-mosul-1476702688

http://www.france24.com/en/20161017-iraq-launches-mosul-offensive-islamic-state-group

http://www.reuters.com/article/us-mideast-crisis-mosul-minorities-insig-idUSKBN12H1SF

 

[Quantum Quack]

It will be interesting to see if Mosul ends up looking like this:

I certainly hope not....

 

[Schmelzer]

Not probable. There was only a short battle when Daesh has taken the whole town, and the Iraq army did only run away. Then it was all the time under complete control of one side, thus, no destruction. Now it will be retaken once, with a quite large power. Very different from the many years of permanent battle between different factions of the Syrian civil war.

By the way, some pictures from Aleppo before the Russians came (they came Sept. 2015)

May 2015

February 2013

October 2012
Just to help you to explain how to distinguish what Russians are responsible for and what was already destroyed when they came. (I know, no problem for you, these are 100% all the evil Assad forces with their barrel bombs or so, the moderate rebels throw only cotton balls.)

Whatever, in comparison I would expect that Mossul is essentially not destroyed yet. There are rumors about hidden agreements that Daesh will leave the city without really fighting, I doubt, but it is not completely impossible. In this case, it has good chances to remain mostly intact.

Good news from Syria: https://www.almasdarnews.com/article/rebels-surrender-another-important-suburb-rural-damascus/ writes that the negotiations about the Mo'adhimiyah Al-Sham suburb of Damascus have been finished and everything is prepared for the surrender of the suburb to the Syrian army. And similar negotiations have started now in the town Zakiyah https://www.almasdarnews.com/article/rebel-held-town-western-ghouta-surrender-saas-advance/

Less important, because it will predictably give nothing, is that the Syrian and Russian airforce will stop their attacks on Aleppo for 48 hours before an 8 hour one-sided ceasefire, which will give anybody the chance to leave Aleppo using two corridors. The terrorists have already declared that they will not accept this offer to leave Aleppo, and predictably they will not allow their civilian hostages to leave too. Even if they will, of course, not declare this.

The Western media reaction will be interesting. Predictably they will talk about the population not trusting Assad and so on. This explanation will be in obvious conflict with many successful negotiations, where those who wanted to continue fighting have been transferred with families to terrorist-hold Idlib and those who simply gave up fighting and laid down their weapons fell under amnesty, and this worked (else, other towns would not repeat it). But, given that Western sheeple are not informed about all this anyway, it does not matter.

 

[Yazata]

Witnesses report columns of regular Iraqi army, Shiite and Sunni irregulars, US 101'st airborne and various US special forces, and Kurdish Peshmerga on the move. (What has happened to Washington's promises of no US boots on the ground?)

The US General in charge of Operation Inherent Resolve says that all the infantry and front-line combat troops will be Iraqi. The US will be supplying close air support, plus various specialist functions on the ground, including artillery, intelligence, forward air controllers for the air strikes and US advisors at the battalion level.

http://www.military.com/daily-news/2016/10/17/us-troops-in-harms-way-as-battle-for-mosul-begins.html

 

[Quantum Quack]

Not probable. There was only a short battle when Daesh has taken the whole town, and the Iraq army did only run away. Then it was all the time under complete control of one side, thus, no destruction. Now it will be retaken once, with a quite large power. Very different from the many years of permanent battle between different factions of the Syrian civil war.

By the way, some pictures from Aleppo before the Russians came (they came Sept. 2015)....

A couple of points.

• You are displaying images that could be anything and potentially any where.
• syrianfreepress.files.wordpress.com
  2.bp.blogspot.com
  ichef.bbci.co.uk​
• The media sites you ripped them from are no more or less the very propaganda sites you keep constantly referring to as part of a "sheeple" conspiracy.
  
• The fact that you accept evidence that supports your case as legit and evidence that doesn't as false...

also you keep saying that it wasn't Russia's involvement that has led to the current state of Aleppo
Can I ask you :
When did Russia agree to be an ally of the Assad Government?
Can you find any evidence that doesn't support your case for a "sheeple" conspiracy?
And ultimately who exactly is responsible for being a "sheeple" ...in your opinion ?

 

[Schmelzer]

Interesting news about the actual Aleppo situation: While many terrorist groups have officially rejected the proposal to leave Aleppo, there is already one group, part of Ahrar al Sham, which has already used the proposal and was driven out of Aleppo by the usual UN green busses. Not much, but >150 is not nothing too. https://twitter.com/IvanSidorenko1?ref_src=twsrc^tfw for the background.

That means, forget about lies that the terrorists do not use the proposals because they do not trust the Syrian/Russian side.

• You are displaying images that could be anything and potentially any where.
• syrianfreepress.files.wordpress.com
  2.bp.blogspot.com
  ichef.bbci.co.uk​
• The media sites you ripped them from are no more or less the very propaganda sites you keep constantly referring to as part of a "sheeple" conspiracy.
  
• The fact that you accept evidence that supports your case as legit and evidence that doesn't as false...

The point is if I see reliable evidence which contradicts what I think, and which I consider as reliable, I change my position. The result is that after this the reliable (imho) evidence supports my (modified) case.

I have not claimed that your beloved video itself is somehow false, that it shows, say, not Aleppo but some other town or so. The text is of course propaganda, but this does not change the pictures themselves. My point is that it is almost impossible to make conclusions from this video about who is responsible for the destruction.

My point of using pictures also from Western propaganda sources is simple: You will have more difficulty to question these pictures, without questioning the reliability of Western media. In fact, I would not wonder if it appears that these pictures appear not to be from Aleppo. But, so what - this would be a problem of your beloved Western propaganda sources, not my. What seems clear about them is the date. While it would be, in principle, possible, it is hard to imagine why would one falsify the date. So, they show how Aleppo looked like before the Russians came. My criterion of choice was not the source, but if it shows some larger picture, more than what could be attributed to a single bomb, and is dated before Sept. 2015.

I repeatedly made the point that all sources have their prejudices. And what one has to learn is to extract reliable information from propaganda sources. This is an example: I use a Western propaganda source, to extract the information that at that date some part of Aleppo looked like that.

also you keep saying that it wasn't Russia's involvement that has led to the current state of Aleppo
Can I ask you :
When did Russia agree to be an ally of the Assad Government?

I would have to check history books to find out when the Soviet Union started to be an ally of Syria. Certainly back in the 1970s, I would guess much earlier. Do you want to argue that some political alliance alone makes the state responsible for all crimes of the other state? Not a good idea for the US propaganda. One could start to remember Pinochet or Pol Pot. Or, more actually, Saudi Arabia with its known (even by Hillary) direct support for ISIS. So, think twice about such ideas.

Can you find any evidence that doesn't support your case for a "sheeple" conspiracy?
And ultimately who exactly is responsible for being a "sheeple" ...in your opinion ?

The phrase "sheeple conspiracy" makes no sense for me. Sheeple maybe victims of conspiracies, but do not conspire. Everybody is responsible for himself. One becomes part of the sheeple if one believes primitive propaganda by the mass media, in a world where the internet gives a lot of different possibilities.

 

[Quantum Quack]

One becomes part of the sheeple if one believes primitive propaganda by the mass media, in a world where the internet gives a lot of different possibilities.

and who is responsible for their beliefs? The media or the person?
The media doesn't make sheeple...

I repeatedly made the point that all sources have their prejudices. And what one has to learn is to extract reliable information from propaganda sources. This is an example: I use a Western propaganda source, to extract the information that at that date some part of Aleppo looked like that.

Given what you have just written why do you expect others to believe your particular interpretation of the media?
What qualifies your opinion as being accurate?
For all I know you could be a Russian professional troll (another form of media) as other board members have suggested. How would I know you are not?

While it would be, in principle, possible, it is hard to imagine why would one falsify the date. So, they show how Aleppo looked like before the Russians came. My criterion of choice was not the source, but if it shows some larger picture, more than what could be attributed to a single bomb, and is dated before Sept. 2015.

The date would be the first thing to falsify, why would you think otherwise?
even if you stripped all the meta tags from with in the files and confirmed it's (re)creation date that would tell you jack sh*t.

 

[Quantum Quack]

Saudi Arabia with its known (even by Hillary) direct support for ISIS. So, think twice about such ideas.

Which member(s) of the vast Saudi Royal family is/where responsible for sponsoring ISIL? Do you know the history of Islam in Saudi Arabia?
The birth of Wahhabism ( extremely conservative Islam) and how that rests with the royals generally?
Why do you think the Saudi Government agreed to assist in the degradation of Da'esh if they were simultaneously sponsoring them?
Wasn't Osama Bin laden a Saudi Royal?
What news sources are you drawing your conclusions from.

have a read:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Response_of_Saudi_Arabia_to_ISIL
remember the reference is only wiki and about as true as who ever published the contents want's it to be.

 

[Schmelzer]

and who is responsible for their beliefs? The media or the person?

Who is responsible - a cheater or his victim? I think, some responsibility is on the victims side too. If they would behave reasonably, the cheater would have had no good chance to cheat them.

Given what you have just written why do you expect others to believe your particular interpretation of the media?

I do not expect such things. I explain what I think and why. You have to think and decide yourself.

For all I know you could be a Russian professional troll as other board members have suggested. How would I know you are not?

For all I know you could be an American professional troll. How would I know you are not?

For me, the answer is simple. I don't care about such an ad hominem.

The date would be the first thing to falsify, why would you think otherwise?

The usual way is some article is written at some day, and published. The date of publication is visible. What is quite typical falsification is to use an old picture and present it as a new one. I have cared about the date of publication as indicated, and cared about < Sept. 2015. If the picture was older, it remains < Sept. 2015.
Pictures from 2016 have not been available yet in 2015. So, even if falsified in the usual way, I would, in this case, not be fooled.

Who would care about falsifying very old articles by putting new pictures into them? What would be reached? Anyway nobody reads them except a few historians.

What news sources are you drawing your conclusions from.

News sources who have claimed that some wikileaks of Hillary emails have proven that Hillary has known that ISIS (at that time ISIL) was supported from Saudi Arabia. Like this:

“While this military/para-military operation is moving forward, we need to use our diplomatic and more traditional intelligence assets to bring pressure on the governments of Qatar and Saudi Arabia, which are providing clandestine financial and logistic support to ISIL and other radical Sunni groups in the region,” Clinton wrote.

http://dailycaller.com/2016/10/10/h...bia-and-qatar-are-funding-isis/#ixzz4NWhRyTGi

Which member(s) of the vast Saudi Royal family is/where responsible for sponsoring ISIL? Do you know the history of Islam in Saudi Arabia?
The birth of Wahhabism ( extremely conservative Islam) and how that rests with the royals generally?
Why do you think the Saudi Government agreed to assist in the degradation of Da'esh if they were simultaneously sponsoring them?
Wasn't Osama Bin laden a Saudi Royal?

Interesting questions, but my answers are behind a paywall. How much you offer?

 

[Quantum Quack]

ok..
Just out of curiosity,
Do you feel the stories that tell of concerns about upwards of 1 million Mosul residents may all, more or less at the same time, flee the city once Iraqi coalition forces enter the city perimeter, causing a massive problem of accommodating near 1 Million displaced persons in a very short time frame are true and justified?

 

[Yazata]

Now I wonder if the "FSA"/Turks will push on to Al Bab, which appears to be the only significant town ISIS still holds in the far north.

It looks like both the "FSA"/Turks and the SDF Kurds from the Afrin enclave are both pushing towards al Bab in kind of a race. If the Kurds grab it, it wouldn't be hard to link it up with nearby Manbij to create their Rojava across all of northern Syria. The Turks will try to prevent that.

See here:

http://www.edmaps.com/Syria_Battle_for_Azaz_AlBab_October_19.png

 

[Schmelzer]

Do you feel the stories that tell of concerns about upwards of 1 million Mosul residents may all, more or less at the same time, flee the city once Iraqi coalition forces enter the city perimeter, causing a massive problem of accommodating near 1 Million displaced persons in a very short time frame are true and justified?

I have not seen such stories and have no idea about this.

 

[Yazata]

The race to al Bab continues. The "FSA"/Turks are only about 5 miles outside. It looks to me like they will beat the Kurds there and prevent Rojava from linking up with the Afrin enclave. There are reports that Turkish artillery is shelling the SDF's Afrin enclave from across the border and that Turkish F-16 jets have launched major air attacks against the Syrian Kurds further east towards Manbij. (I believe that there have recently been US advisors and forward air-controllers embedded with the SDF Kurds near Manbij, so that could get ugly.)

http://www.edmaps.com/Syria_Battle_for_Azaz_AlBab_October_20.png

http://www.military.com/daily-news/2016/10/20/turkey-escalates-campaign-syrian-kurds.html

The assault on Mosul has slowed after a huge burst of publicity on Tuesday. The Iraqis are saying that it's ahead of schedule, but the Kurds are complaining that the Iraqi army has barely moved, while cynics are saying that if the assault is ahead of schedule, then the early day objectives in the schedule must have been minimal.

There's still considerable concern about keeping all the members of the anti-ISIS coalition on the same page: the largely-Shiite Iraqi army, the Iranians (whose Revolutionary Guards are on the scene), the Iranian-backed Shiite militias of the 'Popular Mobilization Forces', the US and its allies like France and the UK, the Iraqi Kurds, a variety of local Sunni Arab militias, the always meddlesome Saudis, the equally meddlesome Turks and their local Iraqi Turkoman surrogates, and many more, including small Christian and Yezedhi militias most interested in protecting their own co-religionists.

Some of these groups hate each other more than they hate ISIS. The US has been trying to get them organized, but that's like herding cats.

The Iraqi government is telling the Turks to stay out of the battle, while Ankara says 'nobody can tell us that!' The US wants to keep the Shiites out of mostly-Sunni Mosul, because of a history of atrocities, but since the Iraqi army is mostly Shiite, that's not going to happen. I guess that the plan is for the Iraqi army to withdraw from Mosul once its taken and to leave local law-enforcement to the local Sunnis.

There's still fear of a huge flood of civilian refugees fleeding the fighting in Mosul. Camps are still being set up to house them, but the flood has been a trickle so far, in the hundreds rather than hundreds of thousands. Many locals in Mosul are hiding at home, for fear of being killed if they wander into a zone where fighting is occurring. But they also fear ISIS might end up using them as human shields.

 

[Yazata]

Reports are coming in that the first US soldier has been killed in the Mosul campaign. Apparently he was embedded with local forces as an advisor (the Kurds? They seem to mostly be the ones advancing into ISIS held territory) and a roadside bomb detonated as his vehicle was passing by. The Kurds have complained that ISIS has left many bombs and booby-traps behind as they withdraw from more exposed positions, slowing the Kurdish advance. I'm told that the British have specialists in Erbil training Kurdish forces on bomb-disposal, a big problem.

 

[Quantum Quack]

The timing is very worrying...

'The Russian aircraft carrier Admiral Kuznetsov and its accompanying contingent of seven ships is understood to be sailing for the Syrian coast to take part in the assault on Aleppo. Separately, two Russian ships are heading north from Portugal to join up with the taskforce."
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2...hrough-the-channel-as-early-as-thursday-night​

Currently a pseudo ceasefire (one sided) has been called for Aleppo apparently allowing people to evacuate the city if possible.
According to some reports on TV the remaining people of Aleppo have generally refused to leave and have decided to fight on.

What is worrying is that the Russian fleets arrival in Syrian waters appears to be timed for the ending of any further attempts by Russia to allow evacuations.

The UN security council appears increasingly nervous. USA and other representatives damning in their criticism of Russia. Met only with a repeated request that the US manage to separate the moderates from the extremists.

Opinion:
All this suggests to me that the war in Aleppo is going to be over rather dramatically and quickly. That Putin has every intention to wipe out the remaining opposition (including civilians) entirely and completely by what ever means he chooses to use.

Of course his options include Nuclear and I suspect that given his strong desire to demonstrate Russia as a credible force in the world he may take that initiative.

Afterwards Putin can claim that he offered every opportunity for the fighters to surrender and civilians to evacuate but they have rejected that offer, thus morally attempting to justify whatever he had ordered.

I believe the world needs to prepare in advance as to how it reacts to the massacre about to unfold. ( if it indeed does )

 

[Schmelzer]

The news of the day in Syria are claims that Douma has started negotiations with the Syrian government. A ceasefire or more in Douma would be really great news. But I doubt that these negotiations will succeed shortly, that needs some time.

The timing is very worrying...
'The Russian aircraft carrier Admiral Kuznetsov and its accompanying contingent of seven ships is understood to be sailing for the Syrian coast to take part in the assault on Aleppo.

Don't worry. this is not about Aleppo at all. Because for Aleppo there is no need at all for additional airpower. There will be, of course, an increase of airpower to bomb terrorists in other parts of Syria, and an increase of defense of the Russian group in case the Americans start something.

Currently a pseudo ceasefire has been called for Aleppo apparently allowing people to evacuate the city if possible.
According to some reports on TV the remaining people of Aleppo have generally refused to leave and have decided to fight on.

That's simply to show everybody interested who is interested in ceasefires and who is not. The terrorists are not interested. One can guess that this is what the US has told them.

What is worrying is that at the moment the Russian fleets arrival in Syrian waters appears to be timed for the ending of any further attempts by Russia to allow evacuations.

Nonsense. Russia is making ceasefires with everybody who is ready to cooperate. The US is now known to be unwilling or unable to hold contracts, so it makes not much sense to do any negotiations with them. If some group on the ground is interested in ceasefire, the Syrians and Russians will negotiate.

What would be the point of negotiating ceasefires with the US if the terrorists break them anyway? With or without order from Washington is, in this case, not the really interesting question on the ground. Once they do not follow the ceasefire negotiated with the US, one could as well negotiate an Aleppo ceasefire with the Vatican, with the same result.

All this suggests to me that the war in Aleppo is going to be over rather dramatically and quickly. That Putin has every intention to wipe out the remaining opposition (including civilians) entirely and completely by what ever means he chooses to use.

Nonsense. There are two options. The US escalates, then everything is open, up to a nuclear war. Or the US does not. Then Russia is in no hurry with Eastern Aleppo. There may be some who think it would be better to finish Eastern Aleppo before Clinton wins, to avoid further escalation about Aleppo if Clinton goes insane. But of course not with such insane fantasies as

Of course his options include Nuclear and I suspect that given his strong desire to demonstrate Russia as a credible force in the world he may take that initiative.

The nuclear option is, of course, on the table, but only if the US attacks. And, as I have explained repeatedly, it is not the first step of escalation.

The first step of escalation is the attackers will be shot down, and everybody agrees not even to mention this. There will be some twitters with some claims, nothing more.

The second step of escalation is a local war on Syrian territory, with the US attacking officially only Syria, and all the defense, in particular air defense, is officially also only Syrian. Similar to Vietnam.